Passed 70-235. Here is my Exam Preparation Diary.

by | Mar 6, 2007 | BizTalk Community Blogs via Syndication

TS: Developing Business Process and Integration Solutions Using Microsoft BizTalk Server 2006 was in my TODO list for a very long time. My last exam  was 74-135 BizTalk 2004 Exam way back in April 2005.

So I decided to write the exam on 5th of March 2007. I did some search to gather as much information as I can to prepare for the exam. For this exam I need to pull materials from variety of sources like MSDN, Blogs, WebCasts, Books, MS e-Learning and Product documentation. It took me enormous amount of time and effort to gather all the materials than actually preparing for the exam. I remember doing the same thing for my 74-135 BizTalk 2004 Exam, now I need to start everything again. So, this time I decided to document each and every step I move forward towards the exam goal and here is the outcome BizTalk Server 2006 Exam (70-235) Preparation Diary

As my first article after the launch of BizTalk 24 * 7 I’ve published my exam preparation diary, hoping it will be helpful for people not only taking the exam but also for some one preparing for interview, or in general a good reference, where all the important points related to BizTalk is in one place. It will be helpful for experienced BizTalk people to glance the document and try the exam.

I’ve also highlighted the document on BizTalk 24 * 7 home page.

Disclaimer: BizTalk Server 2006 Exam (70-235) Preparation Diary is my own preparation guide, there is no guarantee you’ll pass the exam, just by reading the article. Keep the article as starting point, do more research, I put enough reference wherever required, so expand your reading with references mentioned. Good Luck.

Nandri!

Saravana

FizzBuzz for BizTalk

by | Mar 6, 2007 | BizTalk Community Blogs via Syndication

So unless you don’t read any of the “big” .NET bloggers (like Scott

Hanselman’s Blog or Podcast, Phil

Haack, Jeff Attwood,

etc) then you’re likely familiar with the “FizzBuzz” problem described in those various

posts. In case you missed it, the idea of FizzBuzz is a super simple coding

exercise which can be completed during the course of an interview to prove that the

candidate can at least write a program. FizzBuzz in particular is an example

of that as follows:

Write a program that prints the numbers 1 to 100. But for multiples of three

print “Fizz” instead of the number and for multiples of five print “Buzz”. For

numbers which are multiples of both three and five print “FizzBuzz”.

It’s simple, elegant, and proves that the candidate can at least write simple code.

As many people have pointed out, it will not highlight great developers, but it will

knock out bad ones.

My question to the assembled audience here is, what is a good FizzBuzz problem for

BizTalk? Obviously asking you to write a custom Adapter or Pipeline component

is just right out. They are to complex to be accomplished during the time of

an interview. But what is a fair example of this type of problem for BizTalk?

How about sometime like this:

Write, deploy and start a BizTalk solution which will accept an XML file containing

a root node named “Root” and a potentially unlimited number of child nodes of the

root called “Data” from the path “C:\Test\In” and will output the same structure with

to “C:\Test\Out” with the value of every “Data” node multiplied times 100.

Sample Input:

<Root>

<Data>1</Data><Data>2</Data>

<Data>1</Data><Data>2</Data>

</Root>

Sample Output:

<Root>

<Data>100</Data><Data>200</Data>

<Data>100</Data><Data>200</Data>

</Root>

The problem here is there isn’t such a thing as the “5 minute” BizTalk Solution.

I think I could do this solution in 5 minutes, but I wrote the thing. What do

you think? Is this unreasonable to expect during an interview? Again, the point

is not to prove you know BizTalk Server inside out and backwards, it’s to prove that

you don’t know it at all through failure. Thoughts?

Custom pipeline component debugging

by | Mar 6, 2007 | BizTalk Community Blogs via Syndication

Here goes a nice tip about custom pipelines debugging.


 


We have to ways to do this:


 



  • The hard way:


    • Open your custom pipeline code on Visual Studio and place the breakpoint in the desired line.

    • Click on the menu Debug >> Attach to process.

    • Select the process BTSNTSvc.exe and click on the Attach button.

    • Drop a message in a configured port and wait until the code hit the breakpoint.

  • The other way:


    • Open your custom pipeline code on Visual Studio and place the breakpoint in the desired line.

    • Go to the custom pipeline project properties page and click on the Debug tab.

    • On the “Start Action” property, select Start external program and then type “Driveletter$\Program Files\Microsoft BizTalk Server 2006\SDK\Utilities\PipelineTools\Pipeline.exe”

    • On the command line arguments property type “customPipeline.btp -d messageInstance.xml -c”


      • customPipeline.btp = path to the pipeline that use your custom component

      • messageInstance.xml = File that contains the message instance

    • Now, just press F5 and wait until the code hit the breakpoint

 


 


Nice huh?

CAB WPF XBAP implementation available (again)

by | Mar 6, 2007 | BizTalk Community Blogs via Syndication

In the time to come, I’ll be uploading packages available from my previous blog in the past because they got lost during my ISP transfer. First off, here’s the CompositeUI Application Block XBAP WPF implementation, as I blogged about here.


Please note the passwords for both protected signing keys are empty within the solution.


This posting is provided “AS IS” with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Gartner down on Google Apps?

by | Mar 6, 2007 | BizTalk Community Blogs via Syndication

Via jevdemonon how CommBank gives Google Appsathumbs down. This is Gartner’s take:
However, Gartner warned IT managers that Google Apps was “not ready” for enterprise-wide deployments just yet — it lacked key features such as offline availability of stored information. Also, the search giant’s privacy policies, long-term road map and ability to comply with external messaging-related regulations had to be scrutinised.
Lacking offline capabilities is the biggie imo.